Do you know the staff personally? That is an interesting thing to imply about coaches that I would imagine are doing their best to lead the kids they’ve got.
I already went over the differences between Clovis and Woodbridge in another post. To not spend too much time rehashing: it's not that significant. The top 60 runners at Woodbridge is about on par with the top 50 runners at Clovis; Woodbridge had a better top 2 teams, but both had the same amount of NXN Top 15-20 type teams and the same amount of NXR caliber teams.
As for Hole in the Wall vs. Mountain West: Mountain West gets most of the GSL + all of the Montana teams and some other schools here and there. Hole in the Wall gets some of the Seattle teams and Jesuit. Yes that's a more significant difference than Clovis vs. Woodbridge in most years, but that's not THAT huge. Last year was a bit of an exception because a lot of the GSL teams didn't travel to Mountain West; that's not usually the case (or at least it wasn't, and doesn't look to be in 2025). Mead, Lewis & Clark, Cheney, Mt. Spokane, Central Valley, University, North Central, Joel Ferris, Lakeland (ID) and a few other Spokane/CdA area schools are scheduled to be there this year as well as Glacier Peak from the westside and a couple Southern Idaho schools as well (though not the big Boise area schools). That's a strong field before you even add in the best of Montana (not saying it'll be better than Hole in the Wall, but all those teams being there paints a much different picture than you saw in 2024).
The difference between Clovis and Woodbridge is that you see Herriman, SLC, and Crater at Woodbridge. If we are comparing major meets, Clovis is also much later in the season and much harder travel than Woodbridge. If we are comparing weeks, Woodbridge is easier travel and much better competition. Hole in the Wall is easier travel than Clovis.
The simulation I ran for those two meets are with the teams confirmed to be going this year. There's an absolutely massive difference. The top 10 teams in the simulation at Hole in the Wall are Jesuit, CDA, Vacaville, Redmond, Mead, West Ranch, Sehome, Eagle, Poway, Hermiston. The top 10 teams in the simulation at Mountain West are Mead, Bozeman, Mt. Spokane, Cheney, Helena, Sugar-Salem, North Central, Hardin, Glacier Peak, and Lewis and Clark.
Perhaps Emry Carr cares about how much travel is happening when in the season? Especially since we watched Crater do a big travel trip late in the year to Clovis and then melt down at NXR.
I agree it's easier travel in both cases to go to Woodbridge + Hole in the Wall than Clovis + Mountain West.
Again, I already went over the differences between Woodbridge and Clovis. It's not that significant. I'll agree that Hole in the Wall is a little better, but I don't think it's by such a large amount that a team like CdA wouldn't be able to improve from their experience. And, again, the purpose of this exercise was to get JV kids more than just 4 invites to go to since they don't have league meets to gain experience from. I don't think the difference in competition is such that it would be overall detrimental to the program.
I'm not saying I know better than Emry Carr. I never said that. What I did say was that the example slate would be more opportunities for JV runners without sacrificing the experience and progression of the varsity athletes. Allowing JV runners to run at Mountain West instead of no meet, and being able to afford for JV runners to go to NXR, would IMO be significant - much moreso than the different experience of the varsity runners competing at Woodbridge vs. Clovis or Hole in the Wall vs. Mountain West. CdA's coaches are doing a great job of building a program, and maybe their way is better. It's just not how I would do it.
Do you know the staff personally? That is an interesting thing to imply about coaches that I would imagine are doing their best to lead the kids they’ve got.
No, I don't, but there are so many alternatives to what they have done. They have had plenty of opportunities to add two total hours of travel to the day to go race the Utah schools vs. doing Tiger Grizz. They've never done it. They are going 5.5 hours to Lewiston this year.
They are driving 11 hours just to get to travel trips this year and they are racing 3 6A schools in total. They are racing only one other school that is actually a little bit competitive across all three of those meets.
Do you know the staff personally? That is an interesting thing to imply about coaches that I would imagine are doing their best to lead the kids they’ve got.
Also interesting considering they used to travel to Spokane for the Tracy Walters meet in a showdown against the best GSL teams (and Bozeman) early in the season.
The difference between Clovis and Woodbridge is that you see Herriman, SLC, and Crater at Woodbridge. If we are comparing major meets, Clovis is also much later in the season and much harder travel than Woodbridge. If we are comparing weeks, Woodbridge is easier travel and much better competition. Hole in the Wall is easier travel than Clovis.
The simulation I ran for those two meets are with the teams confirmed to be going this year. There's an absolutely massive difference. The top 10 teams in the simulation at Hole in the Wall are Jesuit, CDA, Vacaville, Redmond, Mead, West Ranch, Sehome, Eagle, Poway, Hermiston. The top 10 teams in the simulation at Mountain West are Mead, Bozeman, Mt. Spokane, Cheney, Helena, Sugar-Salem, North Central, Hardin, Glacier Peak, and Lewis and Clark.
Perhaps Emry Carr cares about how much travel is happening when in the season? Especially since we watched Crater do a big travel trip late in the year to Clovis and then melt down at NXR.
I agree it's easier travel in both cases to go to Woodbridge + Hole in the Wall than Clovis + Mountain West.
Again, I already went over the differences between Woodbridge and Clovis. It's not that significant. I'll agree that Hole in the Wall is a little better, but I don't think it's by such a large amount that a team like CdA wouldn't be able to improve from their experience. And, again, the purpose of this exercise was to get JV kids more than just 4 invites to go to since they don't have league meets to gain experience from. I don't think the difference in competition is such that it would be overall detrimental to the program.
I'm not saying I know better than Emry Carr. I never said that. What I did say was that the example slate would be more opportunities for JV runners without sacrificing the experience and progression of the varsity athletes. Allowing JV runners to run at Mountain West instead of no meet, and being able to afford for JV runners to go to NXR, would IMO be significant - much moreso than the different experience of the varsity runners competing at Woodbridge vs. Clovis or Hole in the Wall vs. Mountain West. CdA's coaches are doing a great job of building a program, and maybe their way is better. It's just not how I would do it.
The thing is, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. I think a better criticism is that they aren't finding opportunities for the JV kids to race as much or that they aren't finding a way to get them to those big travel meets.
I think traveling to the higher quality meets that are easier trips is the sound choice. I do also think that there is way more they could do to get their JV kids into more races.
Do you know the staff personally? That is an interesting thing to imply about coaches that I would imagine are doing their best to lead the kids they’ve got.
Also interesting considering they used to travel to Spokane for the Tracy Walters meet in a showdown against the best GSL teams (and Bozeman) early in the season.
Used to being the operative word, and that was now 6 seasons ago. They also traveled 48 kids to that meet and not their entire team.
Tracy Walters was also October 12th the last year they went.
I agree it's easier travel in both cases to go to Woodbridge + Hole in the Wall than Clovis + Mountain West.
Again, I already went over the differences between Woodbridge and Clovis. It's not that significant. I'll agree that Hole in the Wall is a little better, but I don't think it's by such a large amount that a team like CdA wouldn't be able to improve from their experience. And, again, the purpose of this exercise was to get JV kids more than just 4 invites to go to since they don't have league meets to gain experience from. I don't think the difference in competition is such that it would be overall detrimental to the program.
I'm not saying I know better than Emry Carr. I never said that. What I did say was that the example slate would be more opportunities for JV runners without sacrificing the experience and progression of the varsity athletes. Allowing JV runners to run at Mountain West instead of no meet, and being able to afford for JV runners to go to NXR, would IMO be significant - much moreso than the different experience of the varsity runners competing at Woodbridge vs. Clovis or Hole in the Wall vs. Mountain West. CdA's coaches are doing a great job of building a program, and maybe their way is better. It's just not how I would do it.
The thing is, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. I think a better criticism is that they aren't finding opportunities for the JV kids to race as much or that they aren't finding a way to get them to those big travel meets.
I think traveling to the higher quality meets that are easier trips is the sound choice. I do also think that there is way more they could do to get their JV kids into more races.
That may be partially true, but I'm not sure that's entirely true.
CdA has 2 coaches and attend meets almost every weekend as it is. That doesn't offer a lot of potential to add meets. And your suggestion supposes that they would prefer to split the team into 2 travel squads. It might well be the case that the only reason they aren't taking all of the JV kids to these big time meets is because of financial constraints rather than specifically seeking out different opportunities for different members of their program.
Also interesting considering they used to travel to Spokane for the Tracy Walters meet in a showdown against the best GSL teams (and Bozeman) early in the season.
Used to being the operative word, and that was now 6 seasons ago. They also traveled 48 kids to that meet and not their entire team.
Tracy Walters was also October 12th the last year they went.
That was also the last year that meet was ran. Pretty key reason why that "used to" be the case.
The point was that they have shown in the past that they are willing to travel to face competition and not merely wait for competition to come to them. It's not their fault that Bob Firman, the most competitive invite in the region, has been held in their backyard as has NXR. I'm sure Rocky Mountain will continue to attend NXR even if the meet isn't in Boise this year or especially in future years.
Regardless, to the core point that needs to be made:
How many big time meets do teams need to attend in order to reach their potential? Not all elite teams go to multiple massive meets a year, and it can certainly be argued that there is value in focusing more on training rather than racing big meets nearly every week. If RM gets the competition it needs at Bob Firman and feel their efforts are better spent developing their JV program and building depth and focusing on training, why should they change? What they are doing seems to work for them fairly well, and they aren't the only ones following a similar strategy and seeing similar results.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
Yeah watchout I think they made the program change after Covid. Their head coach is a GSL guy so I think there was a connection to the Tracy Walters meet. Last year on the Idaho thread I remember reading something from a parent or someone closely related to their team saying that they tried the Utah meet idea to get their entire team down there, but it was just outside of the range that the bus companies could do in a day trip. I wonder how they are getting the entire team up to Lewiston this year, because I know from observation they like to preview the State course each year (Lewiston, Pocatello, or Eagle Island depending on the year).
The thing is, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. I think a better criticism is that they aren't finding opportunities for the JV kids to race as much or that they aren't finding a way to get them to those big travel meets.
I think traveling to the higher quality meets that are easier trips is the sound choice. I do also think that there is way more they could do to get their JV kids into more races.
That may be partially true, but I'm not sure that's entirely true.
CdA has 2 coaches and attend meets almost every weekend as it is. That doesn't offer a lot of potential to add meets. And your suggestion supposes that they would prefer to split the team into 2 travel squads. It might well be the case that the only reason they aren't taking all of the JV kids to these big time meets is because of financial constraints rather than specifically seeking out different opportunities for different members of their program.
There are plenty of meets in North Idaho or Spokane that they could get that aren't really travel trips for them.
Also, Rocky could easily decide to not race the state preview meet and go toe to toe with all of the GSL and CDA at the Battle for the 509. Same weekend and nearly the same travel. Instead, they are racing essentially nobody at the Inland Empire meet.
Yeah watchout I think they made the program change after Covid. Their head coach is a GSL guy so I think there was a connection to the Tracy Walters meet. Last year on the Idaho thread I remember reading something from a parent or someone closely related to their team saying that they tried the Utah meet idea to get their entire team down there, but it was just outside of the range that the bus companies could do in a day trip. I wonder how they are getting the entire team up to Lewiston this year, because I know from observation they like to preview the State course each year (Lewiston, Pocatello, or Eagle Island depending on the year).
Yeah, I'm sure part of the reason RM went to Tracy Walters was because of their coaches' ties to the North Central program and the Spokane running scene. And that meet hasn't been hosted since because it was cancelled during COVID and North Central hasn't tried to run it since then (they had a coaching change).
My point, though, was that the RM coaches weren't afraid of traveling to find competition back then. Why assume it's different now? I would assume that they would have continued to travel to Spokane for the Tracy Walters meet if it was still being held.
Used to being the operative word, and that was now 6 seasons ago. They also traveled 48 kids to that meet and not their entire team.
Tracy Walters was also October 12th the last year they went.
That was also the last year that meet was ran. Pretty key reason why that "used to" be the case.
The point was that they have shown in the past that they are willing to travel to face competition and not merely wait for competition to come to them. It's not their fault that Bob Firman, the most competitive invite in the region, has been held in their backyard as has NXR. I'm sure Rocky Mountain will continue to attend NXR even if the meet isn't in Boise this year or especially in future years.
Regardless, to the core point that needs to be made:
How many big time meets do teams need to attend in order to reach their potential? Not all elite teams go to multiple massive meets a year, and it can certainly be argued that there is value in focusing more on training rather than racing big meets nearly every week. If RM gets the competition it needs at Bob Firman and feel their efforts are better spent developing their JV program and building depth and focusing on training, why should they change? What they are doing seems to work for them fairly well, and they aren't the only ones following a similar strategy and seeing similar results.
How many potential NXN qualifying teams have had the luxury of training on the NXR course while simultaneously only running one major invitational all year, which is also on that course? How many of them also have multiple options to race large invitationals with less than 3 hours of travel each way yet choose to not do it?
I think the list very well might be just Rocky Mountain.
That may be partially true, but I'm not sure that's entirely true.
CdA has 2 coaches and attend meets almost every weekend as it is. That doesn't offer a lot of potential to add meets. And your suggestion supposes that they would prefer to split the team into 2 travel squads. It might well be the case that the only reason they aren't taking all of the JV kids to these big time meets is because of financial constraints rather than specifically seeking out different opportunities for different members of their program.
There are plenty of meets in North Idaho or Spokane that they could get that aren't really travel trips for them.
Also, Rocky could easily decide to not race the state preview meet and go toe to toe with all of the GSL and CDA at the Battle for the 509. Same weekend and nearly the same travel. Instead, they are racing essentially nobody at the Inland Empire meet.
There are some meets, yes. I am well aware and never said otherwise. They could send their JV to the small schools meets, particularly Lake Spokane on their bye week, or one of the few much less competitive small schools meets in the vicinity. But again: that would be splitting up their team and coaching staff, and might mess with their training plan. It's not necessarily a better idea to unnecessarily split up the team just so your varsity can go to a slightly more competitive meet and your JV go to a worse meet and mess up your training schedule or split up the 2 coaches you have on staff. There are tradeoffs to what you are suggesting. It's not quite true that it "doesn't have to be all or nothing" considering the circumstances. It would be much easier to do what you suggest if the program had more money and more coaches, but if they had more money they could just send their entire team to these far off meets in the first place. So the choices would be to either split up the team even further which might impact training plans, hire more coaches that might be less capable to coach the athletes in the way the coach wants them to be developed (which also costs money), or just recognize that there are meets nearby that you can send your full team to while still getting the competition you need to bring along your varsity.
That was also the last year that meet was ran. Pretty key reason why that "used to" be the case.
The point was that they have shown in the past that they are willing to travel to face competition and not merely wait for competition to come to them. It's not their fault that Bob Firman, the most competitive invite in the region, has been held in their backyard as has NXR. I'm sure Rocky Mountain will continue to attend NXR even if the meet isn't in Boise this year or especially in future years.
Regardless, to the core point that needs to be made:
How many big time meets do teams need to attend in order to reach their potential? Not all elite teams go to multiple massive meets a year, and it can certainly be argued that there is value in focusing more on training rather than racing big meets nearly every week. If RM gets the competition it needs at Bob Firman and feel their efforts are better spent developing their JV program and building depth and focusing on training, why should they change? What they are doing seems to work for them fairly well, and they aren't the only ones following a similar strategy and seeing similar results.
How many potential NXN qualifying teams have had the luxury of training on the NXR course while simultaneously only running one major invitational all year, which is also on that course? How many of them also have multiple options to race large invitationals with less than 3 hours of travel each way yet choose to not do it?
I think the list very well might be just Rocky Mountain.
Off the top of my head...
American Fork, Fayetteville-Manlius, CBA, Wayzata, York are examples of teams that don't travel to multiple huge meets far away and they are consistently in contention for NXN trophies and championships. I don't think AF, Wayzata or York travel far to ANY meet. CBA travels to 1 meet outside their area, and same with FM.
Loudoun Valley was the same for a couple years, only going to 1 meet outside their area.
I don't think The Woodlands travels to more than 1-2 big meets either.
That's not much different, aside from simply not being in the same city as where NXR is held (aside from The Woodlands).
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples I'm not thinking of off the top of my head. It has been a while since I paid close attention to this sport after all, and there are a few dozen programs you can point to as seeing stretches of similar results to RM over the years.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
1. CDA has a sparse schedule and should get the JV kids into more meets. 2. CDA is racing a schedule that gives them an argument for making NXN if they get third. 3. Rocky has a bad schedule. 4. There are a lot more options for them if they want to have a better shot at getting an at-large.
It’s pretty simple. Neither team needs to do things the way they currently are. Both can make small changes that would greatly benefit themselves.
How many potential NXN qualifying teams have had the luxury of training on the NXR course while simultaneously only running one major invitational all year, which is also on that course? How many of them also have multiple options to race large invitationals with less than 3 hours of travel each way yet choose to not do it?
I think the list very well might be just Rocky Mountain.
Off the top of my head...
American Fork, Fayetteville-Manlius, CBA, Wayzata, York are examples of teams that don't travel to multiple huge meets far away and they are consistently in contention for NXN trophies and championships. I don't think AF, Wayzata or York travel far to ANY meet. CBA travels to 1 meet outside their area, and same with FM.
Loudoun Valley was the same for a couple years, only going to 1 meet outside their area.
I don't think The Woodlands travels to more than 1-2 big meets either.
That's not much different, aside from simply not being in the same city as where NXR is held (aside from The Woodlands).
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples I'm not thinking of off the top of my head. It has been a while since I paid close attention to this sport after all, and there are a few dozen programs you can point to as seeing stretches of similar results to RM over the years.
There's a major part of what I said that you didn't answer. Which of those teams do the majority of their runs on the actual NXR course? The one major invitational that Rocky runs is the course they train on, which is also the NXR course.
All of those schools are running more than one big meet, and one of those is a meet they travel to. The only team you mentioned that has the opportunity to train on the course is The Woodlands and that's not the case anymore.
American Fork, Fayetteville-Manlius, CBA, Wayzata, York are examples of teams that don't travel to multiple huge meets far away and they are consistently in contention for NXN trophies and championships. I don't think AF, Wayzata or York travel far to ANY meet. CBA travels to 1 meet outside their area, and same with FM.
Loudoun Valley was the same for a couple years, only going to 1 meet outside their area.
I don't think The Woodlands travels to more than 1-2 big meets either.
That's not much different, aside from simply not being in the same city as where NXR is held (aside from The Woodlands).
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples I'm not thinking of off the top of my head. It has been a while since I paid close attention to this sport after all, and there are a few dozen programs you can point to as seeing stretches of similar results to RM over the years.
There's a major part of what I said that you didn't answer. Which of those teams do the majority of their runs on the actual NXR course? The one major invitational that Rocky runs is the course they train on, which is also the NXR course.
All of those schools are running more than one big meet, and one of those is a meet they travel to. The only team you mentioned that has the opportunity to train on the course is The Woodlands and that's not the case anymore.
What you are arguing is simply a matter of location, as I said in my original reply to this point of yours. I would also question whether running the majority of their runs on the NXR course really has that much more impact than simply racing on the course 2-3 times a year (NXR, an Invitational, and possibly the state meet).
What big meets are those teams I listed traveling to? Again, it's been a while since I paid much attention to the sport, but from my recollection, from what used to be the top boys programs in the nation:
American Fork UT: never traveled far. North Central WA: only traveled to Bob Firman. Fayetteville-Manlius NY: only traveled to Manhattan CBA NJ: only traveled to Great American The Woodlands TX: traveled to 1 meet a year (e.g. Woodbridge) York IL: never traveled far.
And Wayzata MN, which never traveled far.
And Loudoun Valley VA, which had a shorter run at the top, but again only really traveled once a year IIRC.
Rocky Mountain has a big meet they go to. It just happened to be in their back yard. That's not a slight on their program building strategy, that's just a benefit to their reality. Does going to additional meets far away give them a better chance to succeed? That's debatable, but other teams have faced similar questions and responded similarly to RM with similar (or even much better in the cases above) results.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.